As an American resident, you have several civil liberties—freedom of press, the right to a fair trial, and freedom of speech, to name a few. Provided that such liberties protect you against the government, all habitants of the United States should make themselves familiar with—at minimum—the first ten Amendments.
However, if you have failed to follow such wise advice of Eric Buran, and your Bill of Rights knowledge isn’t looking too Bill of Bright, then allow me to refresh your memory:
In the First Amendment, your freedom of religion is protected under both the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause. These two Constitutional parts ensure that you may practice whatever religion you please, and the government cannot endorse or “establish” one specific doctrine, such as Christianity, or Buddhism. Such clauses are fundamental to the historic ideals of the United States.
But what if one person’s free exercise infringed on another person’s free existence?
Long before and long after the landmark same-sex marriage ruling in Obergefell v Hodges, opponents of same-sex marriage have often referenced the Bible as evidence against homosexuality. In 2022, amid controversy over a same-sex and interracial marriage bill, leaders of the Missouri Baptist Convention argued that the bill was “an intentional attack on the religious freedom of millions of Americans with sincerely held beliefs about marriage, based on dictates of faith in God.” The group ultimately saw marriage as strictly a religious endeavor; thus, “sinful” relationships should never encroach on the divine institution of marriage. According to their viewpoint, free exercise had the ability to limit marriage for some individuals, while protecting it for others.
Such arguments span far beyond discussions of one specific bill. From Pride protesters begging the LGBTQ+ community to “repent,” to the United Methodist Church’s 40-year-long ban of gay clergy members (recently removed last month), religious individuals—while they do not represent religion as a whole—make up a vocal percentage of homophobic Americans. Ironically, even though their anti-gay actions allegedly stem from religion (a Constitutionally protected freedom), their homophobia truly has an unconstitutional objective. Through advocating against same-sex marriage, opponents of Obergefell v Hodges actively inhibit gay Americans’ Fourteenth Amendment rights.
As one of the most commonly used Amendments in Supreme Court cases, the Fourteenth Amendment contains a principle clause which safeguards same-sex relationships: the Equal Protection Clause. Stating that no state can “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws,” the clause prevents discriminatory legislation from having a Constitutional basis. Essentially, one’s identity—be it race, gender, sexual orientation—cannot be a factor in specific law-making. Therefore, the act of existing as a gay person cannot be restricted by United States law.
Nonetheless, proponents of religious-backed homophobia continue to use their Constitutional civil liberty to infringe on the liberty of others. I propose my ideal scenario: you maintain your free exercise; I, my free existence.